Bark River has taken $16,000 of My Money

Status
Not open for further replies.
Grampa said:
Please remember that in all this, only one side of the story has been heard. You won't hear Mike's side unless and until this arrives in court. An actual court, not the "court" of public opinion. And there are two sides.

Steve got Mike to give him a date when he would be paid, which at least at one point Steve said was what he wanted - now let it go.
Click to expand...



I've been to the "other forum", that's where I read of this whole fiasco.

I don't understand why the money isn't refunded. I read the reasons but those reasons, while they may be a valid concern, don't seem to have any legal grounds. It seems like instead of refunding the money when signs of trouble first appeared, it was like they got a free no interest business loan.

I really like my bark river knives, I'm glad I got them when I did because I don't know if I would get them knowing what I know now.

I will be keeping an eye on this thread, I would like to know what happens on 12/31
 
wolfmann601 said:
I get it now; there is a legal contract but Mike Stewart wants to make a profit on SS's 16K. Since there will be profit money on this 16K worth of a contract, I bet a nice profit awaits Mike Stewart. Why would Stewart do the right thing when he has proven in this case to be a snake and it is pretty clear he is using another's money to better himself because he could never raise 2 bucks by himself!!
Mike Stewart isn't doing the right thing, he's not doing the legal thing, he is doing the "scam the investor thing"!

And I would bet a steak dinner that money will still be owed SS in December of 2009 and 2010!!!
Click to expand...

I didn't even think of it that way.

I wonder why Mike locked up his thread too, maybe more evidence was going against him.
 
They do say a leopard can't change its spots...

History and context are important because they point to the present and the future.
 
Just finished reading the other thread and I have reached my own conclusions. I will purchase those knives that I have committed to, as I try to honor my commitments. However neither Bark River nor Sharpshooter Sheaths will ever get another order from me (based on Sharpshooters attitude). Sad as I really like Barkies but cannot bring myself to deal with a man who seems to play only by his own rules, on top of past issues I was unaware of until now.
 
Mike does not do his own dirty work, much too clever for that....gets his lap dogs to do it for him.
 
I just have to say that anyone that took my money for investment, and then did not deliver said investment and refused anything other than an immediate refund, is a thief. Maybe only a part-time thief, but a thief nonetheless.

Pathetic and they will not get my business after publicly admitting the misappropriation of monies to fund a project that will not benefit the investor.
 
EDCeeker said:
I'm kind of surprised by that, you being a regular knife knut and all :). I've only been into quality knives for a bit over two years, I'm only a "part time" knife knut, and I became aware of the past issues nearly that long ago.
Click to expand...

Kohai999 said:
.this is a prime USDA example of a travesty in the knifeworld, and it should be kept at the top for all to see....there are far TOO many Forumites unaware of the historical and apparently current multiple disservices that Stewart foists upon the community...
Click to expand...

I'm a case in point, and I've been around the knife community a while.

As far as MS's affability, I can agree. We've traded PTs over at the other place, and he was very pleasant. He did some rework on a BRKT for free for me. However, he sent it back with a different sheath, and I wanted my old one that I'd spent time forming and waterproofing. I got lots of promises it would be sent, but I never saw it. At least it wasn't $16K he was supposed to send me. :p
 
Sidehill Gouger said:
I don't think anyone that knows him has ever called Mike a "part time thief" ;)
Click to expand...

Maybe not, but it was an accurate statement that could apply to anyone that takes money for something that they don't intend on delivering and only promise to refund the capital after they have used it.

A lot of people have gone to prison while crying "I was gonna pay it back!". We'll see what happens though.
 
for what it's worth, taking someone's money, not fulfilling the terms of the contact, and NOT refunding immediately, is THEFT.

certainly not a company I'll do business with in the future.

Brett
 
mymindisamob said:
Sidehill Gouger said:
I don't think anyone that knows him has ever called Mike a "part time thief" ;)
Click to expand...
Maybe not, but it was an accurate statement that could apply to anyone that takes money for something that they don't intend on delivering and only promise to refund the capital after they have used it.

A lot of people have gone to prison while crying "I was gonna pay it back!". We'll see what happens though.
Click to expand...

I think he meant that anyone who knew him would call him a full-time thief.
 
bdws1975 said:
for what it's worth, taking someone's money, not fulfilling the terms of the contact, and NOT refunding immediately, is THEFT.

certainly not a company I'll do business with in the future.

Brett
Click to expand...

My sentiments exactly.
 
I'm not trying to defend what was done, but there is the possibility Mike will return more than the initial investment. Hey, ya never know, stranger things have happened.

Just trying to be optimistic (as I put my flame suit on :D).
 
I can't believe this, everyone always talks about how great Mike Stewart is, this is the first time I'm hearing about this whole thing. I really love bark rivers but Mike is in the bad, plain and simple, there's no one who will tell you it's okay to take someones property and then return it on your own sweet time.
I wonder what would happen if this was Lynn Thompson instead of Mike Stewart.
 
Last edited:
3wolves said:
I can't believe this, everyone always talks about how great Mike Stewart is, this is the first time I'm hearing about this whole thing. I really love bark river's but Mike is in the bad, plain and simple, there's no one who will tell you it's okay to take someone property and then return it on your own sweet time.
I wonder what would happen if this was Lynn Thompson instead of Mike Stewart.
Click to expand...

I hate to say this, but I've heard negative things about Mike's business practices several times before this.

It's a shame. Integrity is the most important part of a businessperson's reputation.

Brett
 
Leopards rarely change their spots. Or their sports.

Mike Stewart is a very talented knife-guy. He knows knives. He knows steel. He knows knifemaking. He knows design. No dispute there.

He has absolutely zero character. He is a first class bullshit artist. A flim-flam man. A huckster. A carnival hawker. He has been soaking banks, partners, and investors for close to three decades with the help of some very influential customers that usually also happen to make a lot of money off his product. He has had multiple "Bad deals"-Chris Reeve Knives, Al Mar Knives, Benchmade knives...lots of unhappy collaborators-Rex Applegate, Bob Cargill, Ethan Becker, Jerry Fisk, Pat Crawford,..the list is huge.

Mike's rare defenders are usually only his blind sycophants who don't know any better or a few industry insiders who make big bucks off the knives that he sells to them for fire sale prices in times of need, which is often.

So please, before you defend Bark River because you like the special knife they made you or Mike spent some time yakking it up with you on the phone, do your research.
Don't confuse the quality of the knife with the quality of the man. They are two different things altogether.

Keep in mind the Federal Government doesn't often prosecute people just for the hell of it.
 
I waded through that other thread on that other forum... I am not a lawyer, but regardless of any other issues not handled in any other contract between the two parties, this seems to boil down to a simple breach of contract that has all but been admitted to (nor denied) by the other party... I have not requested a copy of this, but it must be very clear if SS is willing to send anyone a copy that requests to see it.

Taken verbatim from HERE.

Breach of contract means failing to perform any term of a contract without a legitimate legal excuse. The contract may be either written or oral. A breach may include not finishing a job, failure to make payment in full or on time, failure to deliver all the goods, substituting inferior or significantly different goods, not insuring goods, among others. An anticipatory breach may be made by an act which indicates the party will not complete the work.

A breach of contract in legal terms amounts to a broken promise to do or not do an act. Breaches of a contract are single, occurring at a single point in time, or continuing breaches. A lawsuit for breach of contract is a civil action and the remedies awarded are designed to place the injured party in the position they would be in if not for the breach. Remedies for contractual breaches are not designed to punish the breaching party. A contract a a legally enforceable promise, either made in writing or orally. However, certain promises must be reduced to writing in order to satisfy the Statute of Frauds, a rule of evidence that specifies certain matters must be evidenced by a written instrument.

The non-breaching party is relieved of his obligations under the contract by the other party's breach. Courts will award damages in the event of a breach, but the intent is not to punish the breaching party, but rather to put the other party in the position they would occupy if the contract had been fulfilled. In cases where money is inadequate to compensate the aggrieved party, the court may award specific performance to force the breaching party to fulfill the terms of the contract.


Does anyone know how much time from the date of breach (first missed delivery date) that one has to file for breach in the state this contract was signed in? ...Michigan, I think?

The sad thing is that the delivery date could have been re-negotiated between the two parties at anytime right up to the day of delivery and the contract amended, if both parties were willing.



Again... I am not a lawyer, and none of this is legal advice.
 
I finished reading the thread on KF. Bullcrap. Pure and simple. I'd love to see ANYONE justify mike's action in a logical and reasonable way. There's simply no way to do so, outside of allowing personal feelings for Mike or against SS to cloud your thinking.

This is sickening and unless there's a reason not stated, Mike is appearing like a prima dona who believes everyone, even those TO WHOM HE OWES MONEY, should play by his rules.

Shame.

brett
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top